Code of Conduct
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 44
o
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pennsyl-tuckey
    Posts
    1,768
    Blog Entries
    1

    Question Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    No, this is not a thread comparing the two. However, that is my question - I'm wondering if there's any difference between the most recent formulation, in the "original" bottle, and the previous two formulations. I have the most recent version and it smells like a watered down Aramis Havana (although Tsar came first), and the longevity is kinda lame.
    SEEKING BOTTLES OF:

    Aramis New West (preferably old bottle)
    Patrick by Fragrances of Ireland
    Azzaro Aqua
    Gloria by Cacharel

    PM me if you have bottles that you're willing to sell or trade!

  2. #2
    kxe003's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    872

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Yes, the longevity is very average to me, but that is fine as Tsar is not one of my favorites anyway. Although a great fragrance nonetheless.

  3. #3
    hednic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Reside in McLean, Va., Manhattan NYC, Manuel Antonio Costa Rica & Búzios Brasil
    Posts
    305,057

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by kxe003 View Post
    the longevity is very average to me.
    To me also.

  4. #4
    Basenotes Plus
    perfaddict's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Lagos
    Posts
    12,517
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    The newest Tsar is okay. I have it and enjoy it, but it is not as long-lasting as the original version, which is closer to Montana's Parfum d'Homme than to Havana, i think. I wonder why the one in the ribbed bottle was even called Tsar! VC&A must have had a tongue-in-cheek moment then.

    As an aside, one way to tell the difference between original and newest verrsions is that the bottle of the new one is actually transparent, and not opaque like the original.
    ointments and perfume delight the heart....

    #BBOG!

  5. #5
    shamu1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    North Shore, Mass.
    Posts
    2,368

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by perfaddict View Post
    The newest Tsar is okay. I have it and enjoy it, but it is not as long-lasting as the original version, which is closer to Montana's Parfum d'Homme than to Havana, i think. I wonder why the one in the ribbed bottle was even called Tsar! VC&A must have had a tongue-in-cheek moment then.

    As an aside, one way to tell the difference between original and newest verrsions is that the bottle of the new one is actually transparent, and not opaque like the original.
    I agree. Smells great, but not a powerhouse like the original Tsar. I just spray on more, and reapply mid-day. No sweat.
    Check out my blog Pour Monsieur, a no-nonsense guide to men's fragrances:
    http://pourmonsieurblog.blogspot.com/

    Any fragrance that should not be worn in public, should be worn in public.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Dear, I already bought 03 Tsar vintage, and I was disappointed with everyone. The last one I bought even being the same as the first photo did not convince me, I discovered through the research site of the year that it was made in 2008. Then I do not know what else to do! Will I need to find only the TSAR VINTAGE of its release year so I can get all that magic again ?? Please help me!!!

  7. #7
    Dependent yarn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    God's own Country - Yorkshire
    Posts
    2,094

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Funny that this has cropped up as I recently made an error with a purchase of what I believed was a vintage sealed bottle. Turned out to be the clear, ribbed bottle that arrived. At this point I didn't realise that this version was one to avoid so I gave it a try and was confused as it didn't seem to resemble a single review that I had read.

    After a bit of digging and plenty of assistance from a very helpful Basenoter I realised I had the wrong thing - it had an awful curry note going on and as I said, didn't seem to resemble a single review that I had read. To be fair, the person who I bought it off has taken it back but he insisted it was the original formula which I believe to not be the case

  8. #8

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Yeah, unfortunately about a year and a half ago I purchased a bottle on Amazon, expecting the full, rich,scent with high projection and longevity I was accustomed to, only to receive this weak, pissy scent that was not even a pale shadow of the original. Not knowing of the reformulation, I thought that I had received a counterfeit. and contacted Amazon for a refund, which they issued (gotta love Amazon in that regard!).

    Just out of curiosity, I just now googled "original formulation tsar" and found someone (on Amazon!) who claims to have it. Unfortunately, he's asking $145 + $10 shipping, for a bottle I got for $43 at Macy's last time I bought it. I love the scent, really, but not $155 worth for a blind buy from the same source I got burned on last time...

  9. #9
    Dependent
    staticx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    India
    Posts
    2,940

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    I've tried the new formulation some time back and thought that it was a milder...sport version. The old formulation was a beast.
    ------------------------------------------------
    For what its worth!

  10. #10
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    I know this an old thread but Tsar is my favorite, I own both 1st and 3rd formalationsthe 2nd one it was too synthetic too me like too much idk what was going , but it was similar, now the difference is the Oakmoss in the 3rd formula, the scent we love from the vintage formula, it's very good still I love it ,with the current one tho u may wanna spray an extra here and there , or just put some lotion on and it will stick for awhile ruffly about 3-4 hours I like to blend it with my polo green

  11. #11
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    U can find some cheaper ones on eBay for 60-80$ the vintage one not the 3rd version the 1st

  12. #12
    Dependent NickZee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,876
    Blog Entries
    12

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Missing this dearly. Anyone seen any bottles for sale lately? Prices have skyrocketed
    Follow me on Instagram @scentcurator
    Currently wearing: Tuscan Leather by Tom Ford

  13. #13
    The Devil in the Details
    Zealot Crusader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Seattle/Bellevue WA
    Posts
    8,865
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by NickZee View Post
    Missing this dearly. Anyone seen any bottles for sale lately? Prices have skyrocketed
    I'm sure some prestige line will try resurrecting the accord with a bunch of akigalawood stuffed in place of the oakmoss, then charge triple what even the skyrocketed genuine article sells for, and only us BNers will notice.

    Sigh
    oh look, I have a signature
    Discover a searchable archive of my reviews and more at The Scented Devil

  14. #14
    Dependent NickZee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,876
    Blog Entries
    12

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Zealot Crusader View Post
    I'm sure some prestige line will try resurrecting the accord with a bunch of akigalawood stuffed in place of the oakmoss, then charge triple what even the skyrocketed genuine article sells for, and only us BNers will notice.

    Sigh
    Yeah exactly, someone like Phuong Dang is lining up to relaunch it at $450USD .
    Follow me on Instagram @scentcurator
    Currently wearing: Tuscan Leather by Tom Ford

  15. #15
    The Devil in the Details
    Zealot Crusader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Seattle/Bellevue WA
    Posts
    8,865
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by NickZee View Post
    Yeah exactly, someone like Phuong Dang is lining up to relaunch it at $450USD .
    With scent names like "Vermillion Promise" and "The Calling", I'd say he was writing lyrics for a goth rock act and not making perfume. :x
    oh look, I have a signature
    Discover a searchable archive of my reviews and more at The Scented Devil

  16. #16

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Don't like any formulation!
    Last edited by Trauerkraut; 12th July 2019 at 06:43 AM.
    Currently wearing: Oud Immortel by Byredo

  17. #17
    Dependent Slayerized's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    8,529

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Own two bottles of the original vtg opaque version which is a very good fragrance indeed!
    My Top '11' of main current rotation in no particular order:

    - Paco Rabanne: Pour Homme (vtg)
    - Antaeus (vtg)
    - Azzaro: Pour Homme (vtg)
    - TF: Ombré Leather
    - Cartier: Santos edt (vtg)
    - Guerlain: Héritage (vtg)
    - Thierry Mugler: A*men
    - SA: Al Basel
    - D&G: Pour Homme (vtg)
    - Mancera: Red Tobacco
    - Mancera: Aoud Vanille

  18. #18

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    While the vintage smells more powerhouse and has better performance, if really wanting to get this fragrance and only the current formulation was available, personally do still not perceive the difference between the two that striking and so far in the disadvantage of the newer one to not choose the latter
    Currently wearing: Zino Davidoff by Davidoff

  19. #19
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    I own all the versions , and the prices are getting pricey , someone on Amazon wants 500$ for 100ml 3rd version , but he calling it The Vinatge version, u gotta becareful, alot sellers are calling the 2nd and 3rd version Vinatge , and what confused me was ,soooo many sellers are selling 2nd3rd version of Tsar with a price tag of 150-200$ and yet some sellers who actually have the Vinatge bottle Tsar De Van Cleef, is asking 85$ for 50ml or 115$ for 100ml for the first version lmao �� I really don't understand but I've been getting gmy hands on the 1st ones, you guys really gotta look for the bottle that says TSAR DE VAN CLEEF ARPELS. and stay away from the solid green box that's the ribbed bottle

  20. #20

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    I impulse bought this for $50 from some mall vendor. I could have got it on Amazon just a couple years earlier for $30. Has arabic script on the back but supposedly that's normal if for bottle sold in the middle east. Batch code dates it from 2014. Looks legit but this vendor seems to be selling counterfeits too so take that into consideration with this review Anways, I think this is the third version in the dark green translucent bottle.

    My opinion? It's okay at best.
    It opens up in a green, old school way. Not bad but not good either.
    Then it gets a little spicy. Notes of Cinnamon? Pepper? With a bit of pine maybe. I don't know but I didn't like it at this stage and it stays this way for a while. After about 4 hours it changes into this very soapy green scent that's actually kind of nice.

    If this is the real thing, I think this fragrance is highly overrated. It smells very much like a $29.99 fragrance. Top notes aren't great which is surprising, and the middle which is when the fragrance is at its strongest and is kind of pungent and stinky. When it finally dies down to a skin scent it smells old school fresh, green and clean...but still inexpensive smelling. Does it share some similarities with Polo? Drakkar Noir?

    To me, it's more like a mix of Jaguar for Men and Red for Men with a little Irish Spring/Pine thrown it at the finish line.
    Reformulated Jaguar for Men is like a cheaper, more pungent, and tackier variation of Ralph Lauren's Polo.
    Red for Men shares something in common with Preferred Stock, which is like an extremely poor man's version of Drakkar Noir.

  21. #21
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh V. View Post
    I impulse bought this for $50 from some mall vendor. I could have got it on Amazon just a couple years earlier for $30. Has arabic script on the back but supposedly that's normal if for bottle sold in the middle east. Batch code dates it from 2014. Looks legit but this vendor seems to be selling counterfeits too so take that into consideration with this review Anways, I think this is the third version in the dark green translucent bottle.

    My opinion? It's okay at best.
    It opens up in a green, old school way. Not bad but not good either.
    Then it gets a little spicy. Notes of Cinnamon? Pepper? With a bit of pine maybe. I don't know but I didn't like it at this stage and it stays this way for a while. After about 4 hours it changes into this very soapy green scent that's actually kind of nice.

    If this is the real thing, I think this fragrance is highly overrated. It smells very much like a $29.99 fragrance. Top notes aren't great which is surprising, and the middle which is when the fragrance is at its strongest and is kind of pungent and stinky. When it finally dies down to a skin scent it smells old school fresh, green and clean...but still inexpensive smelling. Does it share some similarities with Polo? Drakkar Noir?

    To me, it's more like a mix of Jaguar for Men and Red for Men with a little Irish Spring/Pine thrown it at the finish line.
    Reformulated Jaguar for Men is like a cheaper, more pungent, and tackier variation of Ralph Lauren's Polo.
    Red for Men shares something in common with Preferred Stock, which is like an extremely poor man's version of Drakkar Noir.
    Which version did u buy , Tsar is a very known classic and it's highly praised . I love Tsar first and 3 version own to this day and I'm wearing it now ..it's very well made Fragrance for the price

  22. #22
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh V. View Post
    I impulse bought this for $50 from some mall vendor. I could have got it on Amazon just a couple years earlier for $30. Has arabic script on the back but supposedly that's normal if for bottle sold in the middle east. Batch code dates it from 2014. Looks legit but this vendor seems to be selling counterfeits too so take that into consideration with this review Anways, I think this is the third version in the dark green translucent bottle.

    My opinion? It's okay at best.
    It opens up in a green, old school way. Not bad but not good either.
    Then it gets a little spicy. Notes of Cinnamon? Pepper? With a bit of pine maybe. I don't know but I didn't like it at this stage and it stays this way for a while. After about 4 hours it changes into this very soapy green scent that's actually kind of nice.

    If this is the real thing, I think this fragrance is highly overrated. It smells very much like a $29.99 fragrance. Top notes aren't great which is surprising, and the middle which is when the fragrance is at its strongest and is kind of pungent and stinky. When it finally dies down to a skin scent it smells old school fresh, green and clean...but still inexpensive smelling. Does it share some similarities with Polo? Drakkar Noir?

    To me, it's more like a mix of Jaguar for Men and Red for Men with a little Irish Spring/Pine thrown it at the finish line.
    Reformulated Jaguar for Men is like a cheaper, more pungent, and tackier variation of Ralph Lauren's Polo.
    Red for Men shares something in common with Preferred Stock, which is like an extremely poor man's version of Drakkar Noir.
    If your getting just Irish spring scent I'm assuming u got the glass ribbed bottle , cause the ones I have smells very green and oakmoss and piny and creamy

  23. #23
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh V. View Post
    I impulse bought this for $50 from some mall vendor. I could have got it on Amazon just a couple years earlier for $30. Has arabic script on the back but supposedly that's normal if for bottle sold in the middle east. Batch code dates it from 2014. Looks legit but this vendor seems to be selling counterfeits too so take that into consideration with this review Anways, I think this is the third version in the dark green translucent bottle.

    My opinion? It's okay at best.
    It opens up in a green, old school way. Not bad but not good either.
    Then it gets a little spicy. Notes of Cinnamon? Pepper? With a bit of pine maybe. I don't know but I didn't like it at this stage and it stays this way for a while. After about 4 hours it changes into this very soapy green scent that's actually kind of nice.

    If this is the real thing, I think this fragrance is highly overrated. It smells very much like a $29.99 fragrance. Top notes aren't great which is surprising, and the middle which is when the fragrance is at its strongest and is kind of pungent and stinky. When it finally dies down to a skin scent it smells old school fresh, green and clean...but still inexpensive smelling. Does it share some similarities with Polo? Drakkar Noir?

    To me, it's more like a mix of Jaguar for Men and Red for Men with a little Irish Spring/Pine thrown it at the finish line.
    Reformulated Jaguar for Men is like a cheaper, more pungent, and tackier variation of Ralph Lauren's Polo.
    Red for Men shares something in common with Preferred Stock, which is like an extremely poor man's version of Drakkar Noir.
    , noone is gonna make knock offs of Tsar..noone

  24. #24
    Super Member DudeLebowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    City of Angels
    Posts
    127

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    I have Tsar and the bottle looks like this:

    http://www.basenotes.net/ID26123124.html

    Not sure why it's labeled cologne, because my bottle says EDT underneath.

    It's an excellent green, piney, mossy, leathery fougere. To my nose this version is a cross between Vintage Polo and Nobile. The other day I had Nobile on one arm and Tsar on the other, there were subtle similarities in the dry down. Nobile is absolutely better of course. I haven't tried any of the other versions, I'm just going off the bottle I own.

    What do these new bottles look like?
    Current top 5 Fragrances

    1. Royal Vintage by M. Micallef
    2. Bois Du Portugal by Creed
    3. Vespero by Jeroboam
    4. Masculin Pluriel by MFK
    5. Nobile by Gucci


    "It ain't about how hard you hit:It's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. It's about how much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done." Rocky Balboa

  25. #25
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by DudeLebowski View Post
    I have Tsar and the bottle looks like this:

    http://www.basenotes.net/ID26123124.html

    Not sure why it's labeled cologne, because my bottle says EDT underneath.

    It's an excellent green, piney, mossy, leathery fougere. To my nose this version is a cross between Vintage Polo and Nobile. The other day I had Nobile on one arm and Tsar on the other, there were subtle similarities in the dry down. Nobile is absolutely better of course. I haven't tried any of the other versions, I'm just going off the bottle I own.

    What do these new bottles look like?
    I've been looking for the Cologne version, yes they made one version like this before the released the ribbed bottle as EDT not sure when I'm assuming 2000s around there

  26. #26
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    There's 3 EDT versions which I own two of them a FLANKER and the cologne version which I need to complete

  27. #27
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    IMG_20190731_230512.jpg
    These all the versions I have , I'm missing the ribbed glass bottle for the OP who asked what they looked like

  28. #28
    Super Member DudeLebowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    City of Angels
    Posts
    127

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Drjones152 View Post
    IMG_20190731_230512.jpg
    These all the versions I have , I'm missing the ribbed glass bottle for the OP who asked what they looked like
    But it's not a cologne, it's just called Tsar Eau de Toilette. So which one is considered "vintage"?
    Current top 5 Fragrances

    1. Royal Vintage by M. Micallef
    2. Bois Du Portugal by Creed
    3. Vespero by Jeroboam
    4. Masculin Pluriel by MFK
    5. Nobile by Gucci


    "It ain't about how hard you hit:It's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. It's about how much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done." Rocky Balboa

  29. #29
    Basenotes Junkie Drjones152's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Providence Rhode island
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    The one u have , if the box doesn't say Cologne , then u got the 2nd version , it's the same bottle as the cologne bottle , glass ribbed bottle with a bronze sprayer ..at this point it's also consider vintage since it's discontinued, but the tall bottle I have the green opaque bottle that's the vintage one the original will say Tsar de Van Cleef Arpels, the dark Green glass bottle is the 3rd version it's label just Tsar Van Cleef Arpels and the frosted glass bottle is the FLANKER which is aslo a Vinatge bottle now..so u have the 2nd version , the one noone wants and to stay clear from cause they pretty much ruined that version

  30. #30
    Super Member DudeLebowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    City of Angels
    Posts
    127

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by Drjones152 View Post
    The one u have , if the box doesn't say Cologne , then u got the 2nd version , it's the same bottle as the cologne bottle , glass ribbed bottle with a bronze sprayer ..at this point it's also consider vintage since it's discontinued, but the tall bottle I have the green opaque bottle that's the vintage one the original will say Tsar de Van Cleef Arpels, the dark Green glass bottle is the 3rd version it's label just Tsar Van Cleef Arpels and the frosted glass bottle is the FLANKER which is aslo a Vinatge bottle now..so u have the 2nd version , the one noone wants and to stay clear from cause they pretty much ruined that version
    I think its smells great. People will say just about anything nowadays,nothing Irish Spring about it.
    Current top 5 Fragrances

    1. Royal Vintage by M. Micallef
    2. Bois Du Portugal by Creed
    3. Vespero by Jeroboam
    4. Masculin Pluriel by MFK
    5. Nobile by Gucci


    "It ain't about how hard you hit:It's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. It's about how much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done." Rocky Balboa




Similar Threads

  1. What formulation is this Gentleman??
    By Hasupk@gmail.com in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 2nd March 2009, 09:00 PM
  2. The new Pour Homme Van Cleef & Arpels and Tsar or is it?
    By scentimus in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 29th August 2008, 03:40 PM
  3. Old formulation Ungaro III
    By aljinnie in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24th February 2008, 09:49 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Loving perfume on the Internet since 2000